Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-25-2016, 09:40 PM - 1 Like   #16
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: West Haven, CT USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 997
Isn't it that you would "gain some width" with the K-1 and none of this "lose the reach" thing that has been mentioned from time to time? Magnification doesn't change, just the width of viewing angle. Right?

I think the improved AF with the K-1 would make it a nice step up from the K-3II or the K-5IIs that have been mentioned. That said, you can't look at norm's pictures and think "man that crop sensor is really holding this guy back". I can't anyway.

To the OP, a K-1 does sound like it would be an improvement for what you're looking for. I wonder about a K-1 with a Sigma 20-40 DG (only available used) and what that would be like, or one of the zooms out there that start at 24mm at the wide end, and then have your existing K-5IIs for telephoto tasks to save on lens changes.

05-25-2016, 10:18 PM - 1 Like   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,879
@Suhail, from what I've seen on your (very interesting, bookmarked for later viewing) web site, I could make a case for both the K-1 and K-3. However, one deficiency I see in some of your photos is simply a lack of reach for shooting distant birds. So it seems to me that a K-3 would be most beneficial to you, as the 24MP would provide you with more cropping latitude than your K-5 IIs.

Another option would be to wait a few months and see if Pentax will release a new high-end APS-C camera this year, possibly one that includes a K-1 derived AF unit.
05-25-2016, 10:24 PM - 1 Like   #18
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,966
QuoteOriginally posted by pres589 Quote
Isn't it that you would "gain some width" with the K-1 and none of this "lose the reach" thing that has been mentioned from time to time? Magnification doesn't change, just the width of viewing angle. Right?
No, it all depends on how we use English, by what we mean by our words. Our usual model in comparing two images is that we are going to display both of them in a common manner - on the same screen, on the paper the same size, etc. In that setting, "gain some width", aka "increase width of the viewing angle" means that the medium {screen, sheet of paper, whatever} will show more of the area that was available when the shutter was pressed. In that setting, the opposite means that the medium will show less of the area that was available when the shutter was pressed, which means more of the medium {more pixels, more area of ink, etc} will be available for each component, so each component will appear larger to the observer. Most of us would say that is a working definition of "magnification" ... but I'm not sure it makes sense to argue about these terms as long as we understand the truth.

The truth is that if you take a picture of a bird using a K-1, and that bird takes up roughly 50% of the width of the image and 50% of the height of the image, roughly (1/2)*(1/2)*36MP = 9MP will be used to store the likeness of the bird. If you took exactly the same picture from exactly the same spot at exactly the same time using exactly the same lens, but on a K-3ii, the bird would take up roughly 75% of width of the image and roughly 75% of the height of the image, so roughly (3/4)*(3/4)*24MP = 13.5MP will be used to store the likeness of the bird. Undoubtedly, the K-1 will store nicer looking pixels, but the K-3ii would store more of them. My experience in controlled testing between my Q-7 and my K-30 tells me that more pixels is always nice. I believe that is the truth that so many people here have experienced and that directs their reaction to the questions raised in this thread.

Last edited by reh321; 05-26-2016 at 08:36 AM. Reason: fix typo
05-25-2016, 10:51 PM - 1 Like   #19
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Prince George, BC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,323
I suggest that theory with regard to how a sensor renders an image is exactly that until you use one. This chickadee stopped to say hello while I was walking along one of the park trails in town today. I had the DA*300 + HD1.4 TC on the K-1 in FF mode. Later in post I cropped it down to 4414x2949 from the full frame of 7392x4950, and then down to 1000 on the long side to stay within the PF gallery limits. Despite the loss of resolution, the K-1 renders beautiful images since everything about its output smashes any other Pentax APS-C sensor that came before. 1/500s, ISO800, f/6.7.




Last edited by jbinpg; 05-25-2016 at 10:56 PM.
05-25-2016, 11:32 PM - 1 Like   #20
Pentaxian
newmikey's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,584
I cannot help but wonder all the time why people keep comparing an €800 camera against a €2000 one (even ignoring potentially thousands of euros of necessary lens changes to get the most out of the K-1). Useless exercise IMHO. It is quite obvious the K-1 is more capable in quite a number of areas than the K-3 II (or my K-5 IIs before it) however you really don't choose between two cameras which are in entirely different categories. If you need large format, go for the 645Z, if you need FF go for the K-1 - these are such obvious pieces of advice that I cannot help wondering why everyone is agonizing over it.

Do I need large format or even FF? Do I want to either buy very new and expensive FF or 645 lenses? Do I want to use my existing lenses on a camera for which they were not designed/optimized thereby compromising the performance of both body as well as lens? Absolutely not! What would be the very best camera for my needs? Currently K-3 II but waiting to see which of these exciting K-1 features make it into Pentax's next APS-C body.
05-25-2016, 11:54 PM - 2 Likes   #21
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 986
QuoteOriginally posted by ramseybuckeye Quote
Or the three wider DFA zooms, 15-30, 24-70, and 28-105 are all promising for landscapes. As are plenty of primes, and the DA 12-24 and 10-17 fisheye.
I wonder whether the combo K1 & 15-30 will blow the OP's K5IIs and a da12 24 e.g. away? Comparing to the cash he will have to put on the table for a K1/15-30 vs only the DA 12-24... And don't forget the cost of a more expensive filter solution if he wants to..
05-26-2016, 12:45 AM - 1 Like   #22
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,467
QuoteOriginally posted by newmikey Quote
these are such obvious pieces of advice that I cannot help wondering why everyone is agonizing over it.
:-) because not everyone finished their trial and error journey to finally conclude that it can be boiled down to your sentence.

QuoteOriginally posted by newmikey Quote
Currently K-3 II but waiting to see which of these exciting K-1 features make it into Pentax's next APS-C body.
I have a K3 and a K1. You may like to have tiltable screen, smart dial with crippled lcd and wifi, but honestly, I don't think you want the K1 phase detect AF system in your next APS camera.
05-26-2016, 01:13 AM - 1 Like   #23
Pentaxian
newmikey's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,584
QuoteOriginally posted by grispie Quote
I wonder whether the combo K1 & 15-30 will blow the OP's K5IIs and a da12 24 e.g. away? Comparing to the cash he will have to put on the table for a K1/15-30 vs only the DA 12-24... And don't forget the cost of a more expensive filter solution if he wants to..
It will certainly be significantly better under normal circumstances, more so in low-light situations but I would doubt I'd call that "blow the OP's K5IIs and a da12 24 e.g. away"

QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
I have a K3 and a K1. You may like to have tiltable screen, smart dial with crippled lcd and wifi, but honestly, I don't think you want the K1 phase detect AF system in your next APS camera.
Tiltable screen would certainly be useful especially in macro but I strongly favor the K-S2 approach to that of the K-1. Wifi leaves me absolutely stone-cold.


Last edited by newmikey; 05-26-2016 at 01:23 AM.
05-26-2016, 04:34 AM   #24
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 86
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
I have a K3 and a K1. You may like to have tiltable screen, smart dial with crippled lcd and wifi, but honestly, I don't think you want the K1 phase detect AF system in your next APS camera.


That looks like bad news [for us thinking about the next great APS].
Do you say that because of FF-APS [technical] compatibility issues, or because it just isn't a very good AF, and still far from what was expected?
05-26-2016, 04:56 AM - 1 Like   #25
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,558
I wonder why people keep posting picture, claiming they prove the K-1 is better than my K-3 for small birds, and posting pictures i wouldn't post. I know they think they are doing otherwise but they are just proving my point.

My hope with the K-1 for birding rests entirely with the K-1 being able to accurately focus with my A-400 and F1.7x AF adapter, which my K-3 won't do. 300mm and a 1.4 seems to be the basic K-3 birding set up. You'd need 450 with a 1.4 to get the same reach on a K-1. The you'd have something. You'd have a lot of weight.

Anything I can do with my DA*250 with no TC's, I will be able to do with my A-400, but honestly, in birding, that isn't very much. For birds I almost never take my 60-250 out without at least the HD DA 1.4 on it. It is getting quite annoying K-1 users, saying "ignore the math, ignore the images look how much I love my K-1." Be cool if you post there, don't post an image and tell us how great it is, post an image and see if people like act. At like you've been around a while.

Listen guys, if you think you have proof you've got some images that prove how great the K-1 is for birding, there is the[URL="https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/55946-300mm-plus-lens-club-discuss-your-long-lenses-1453.html"]

Look at what's posted see if what you've got measures up. So far the guys posting with K-1 are shooting in crop mode for the additional frame rate, the importance of which is seriously undervalued by non-birding shooters, and personally, I'm still waiting for some image in crop mode. I know it physically possible for the K-1 to blow the K-3 images away. I'd expect an A-400 image where I nailed the focus, taken at the same range I'd use the 60-250, would produce better images. I'm just not sure that's practical. And once you get to 400 plus the 1.4 on my K-3, I know 600mm and a 1.4 on the K-1 isn't going to be as practical. it's going to be, a portable system I can walk around with, compared to a huge heavy lens with a gimble head.

Pinhilecam has posted an amazing pixel shift image that shows the strength of the K-1 in landscape and cityscapes. It has a place, I'm not sold that it's a one step solution for wildlife and landscape though.

Last edited by normhead; 05-26-2016 at 05:15 AM.
05-26-2016, 05:13 AM   #26
Pentaxian
Driline's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: IOWA Where the Tall Corn Grows
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,973
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
The 28-105mm is a solid lens with only vignetting being a key issue. It is much sharper than the 18-135mm
Adam, would you recommend this as a walk around lens for the K-50? Notwithstanding the different focal range I assume this is much better than the 18-55 kit lens.
05-26-2016, 05:22 AM - 1 Like   #27
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 986
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
If I'm birding... I'm not giving this up.
from my limited small animal shooting experience, including chasing lizzards with the K3 and DA55-300, i'd have a hard time justifying to buy the K1 over the K3 for that purpose.
My k3 does fine for capturing these creatures sharp and fast. Would'nt want to give up the extra reach of the crop sensor and the possibility to crop in post because of the 24mp.

But then again, i'm no birding expert nor have i handled the K1..

For some reason i have the feeling the OP is missing out more on the wideangle area for which it would be interesting to know whether the K1 has much better DR.
05-26-2016, 05:23 AM   #28
Pentaxian
Driline's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: IOWA Where the Tall Corn Grows
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,973
QuoteOriginally posted by jbinpg Quote
I suggest that theory with regard to how a sensor renders an image is exactly that until you use one. This chickadee stopped to say hello while I was walking along one of the park trails in town today. I had the DA*300 + HD1.4 TC on the K-1 in FF mode. Later in post I cropped it down to 4414x2949 from the full frame of 7392x4950, and then down to 1000 on the long side to stay within the PF gallery limits. Despite the loss of resolution, the K-1 renders beautiful images since everything about its output smashes any other Pentax APS-C sensor that came before. 1/500s, ISO800, f/6.7.
I'm not sure what your'e seeing but this image pales in comparison with Norms K-3 bird photo's he just posted in this thread.
05-26-2016, 05:29 AM - 1 Like   #29
Pentaxian
UserAccessDenied's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Maryland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,111
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I wonder why people keep posting picture, claiming they prove the K-1 is better than my K-3 for small birds, and posting pictures i wouldn't post. I know they think they are doing otherwise but they are just proving my point.

My hope with the K-1 for birding rests entirely with the K-1 being able to accurately focus with my A-400 and F1.7x AF adapter, which my K-3 won't do. 300mm and a 1.4 seems to be the basic K-3 birding set up. You'd need 450 with a 1.4 to get the same reach on a K-1. The you'd have something. You'd have a lot of weight.

Anything I can do with my DA*250 with no TC's, I will be able to do with my A-400, but honestly, in birding, that isn't very much. For birds I almost never take my 60-250 out without at least the HD DA 1.4 on it. It is getting quite annoying K-1 users, saying "ignore the math, ignore the images look how much I love my K-1." Be cool if you post there, don't post an image and tell us how great it is, post an image and see if people like act. At like you've been around a while.

Listen guys, if you think you have proof you've got some images that prove how great the K-1 is for birding, there is the[URL="https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/55946-300mm-plus-lens-club-discuss-your-long-lenses-1453.html"]

Look at what's posted see if what you've got measures up. So far the guys posting with K-1 are shooting in crop mode for the additional frame rate, the importance of which is seriously undervalued by non-birding shooters, and personally, I'm still waiting for some image in crop mode. I know it physically possible for the K-1 to blow the K-3 images away. I'd expect an A-400 image where I nailed the focus, taken at the same range I'd use the 60-250, would produce better images. I'm just not sure that's practical. And once you get to 400 plus the 1.4 on my K-3, I know 600mm and a 1.4 on the K-1 isn't going to be as practical. it's going to be, a portable system I can walk around with, compared to a huge heavy lens with a gimble head.

Pinhilecam has posted an amazing pixel shift image that shows the strength of the K-1 in landscape and cityscapes. It has a place, I'm not sold that it's a one step solution for wildlife and landscape though.
Just want to offer some criticism, mainly because I like to play advocate...

disclaimer:
I do not own a K-1.
I do own a K-3ii and the DA*300.
I love my K-3ii and I do not think a K-1 is in my foreseeable future...

criticism:
Norm, I agree that the people ignoring the math are quite frustrating, however you have to agree the low-light performance of the K-3/K-3ii is not great... At least when comparing to the K-1. I think most people are raving about the K-1 because the AF is superb and the ISO performance is top notch. It handles well for a FF and it's overall just something to rave about...
Don't get me wrong, I love the K-3ii - It well surpasses my skills as a photographer at this point in my life. One day I see the FF K-1 being a nice rounded addition to my kit.

Don't take it personally, but I tend to dislike your style of post processing. It's all personal preference, perhaps you dislike my style of shoot and that's perfectly fine with me.
The only reason I say that thought is with the curiosity of whether the K-1 would achieve something in rendering your images that you want from the K-3 but can only get in PP.
It looks like you want more contrast and deeper highlights from your birds images. I see heavy saturation and sharpening in your images.
Perhaps the K-1 would provide this rendering by default, or closer to it at least?

All I'm saying is I wouldn't bag it until you try it.

Again, I do not own a K-1, haven't even handled one in person...
But I'd love to give it a shot, even if I lose a few degrees of FOV with my DA*300.

Cheers!
Logan

---------- Post added 05-26-16 at 08:32 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Driline Quote
I'm not sure what your'e seeing but this image pales in comparison with Norms K-3 bird photo's he just posted in this thread.
Honestly, I'd like to see a raw image of both to compare.
No cropping and no post processing...

I tend to like this shot better than all of Norm's solely due to PP technique.

to each their own.
05-26-2016, 05:42 AM - 3 Likes   #30
Pentaxian
Oldbayrunner's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Havre de Grace, MD
Posts: 1,234
QuoteOriginally posted by Mistlefoot Quote
You already have 2 quality bodies. You have a 300mm (450 on your crop) that will be shortened by the full frame K-1.
Sorry but this is incorrect. A 300mm lens is a 300mm lens whether it is on a crop sensor camera or not. It does not become 450mm period. The only thing that would change is the imaging recorded by each sensor size. So no lengthening or shortening occurs in lens mm going from one body to the other.

Last edited by Oldbayrunner; 05-26-2016 at 06:01 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
advice, birds, camera, crop, dslr, frame, image, images, k-1, k-3, k-3ii, k-5iis, k-s2, k1, landscapes, lens, love, macro, nature, people, photography, pm, post, quality, sensor, wide-angle, wildlife
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
bought a k-3II instead of K-1 Venom3300 Pentax DSLR Discussion 77 05-08-2016 06:35 AM
Why I wouldn't buy a K-1 onlineflyer Pentax K-1 6 02-19-2016 12:57 PM
Why I will not buy a K-1 Franc Pentax K-1 24 02-17-2016 05:28 PM
For Sale - Sold: New in box: 16GB Pentax FLUcard O-FC1 (tether your K-3, K-3II, K-S1, or 645z) cheekygeek Sold Items 3 10-28-2015 05:08 AM
Do I buy a Q S-1 or 08 Lens? sapporodan Pentax Q 31 06-08-2015 03:49 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:39 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top